[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091007201017.GC66690@dspnet.fr.eu.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 22:10:17 +0200
From: Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] add MAP_UNLOCKED mmap flag
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 08:59:52PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 08:50:54PM +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 02:16:03PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > I did. It allows me to achieve something I can't now. Steps you provide
> > > just don't fit my needs. I need all memory areas (current and feature) to be
> > > locked except one. Very big one. You propose to lock memory at some
> > > arbitrary point and from that point on all newly mapped memory areas will
> > > be unlocked. Don't you see it is different?
> >
> > What about mlockall(MCL_CURRENT); mmap(...); mlockall(MCL_FUTURE);?
> > Or toggle MCL_FUTURE if a mlockall call can stop it?
> >
> This may work. And MCL_FUTURE can be toggled, but this is not thread
> safe.
Just ensure that your one special mmap is done with the other threads
not currently allocating stuff. It's probably a synchronization point
for the whole process anyway.
OG.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists